869 replies to this topic

[Not A Real RAbbi]

To be honest, SCRAP the whole damned thing.

Take Koniving's ol' CW/FW idea (check his sig, if it's in there this week) and implement it.

Better NO FW, than BAD FW. And what we have right now is BAD FW.

Also, I blanket second every suggestion that Tarogato makes for FW, as well as his criticisms of it.

Edited by Sister RAbbi, 25 July 2016 - 07:12 PM.

[Cato Zilks]

Tarogato, on 25 July 2016 - 06:52 PM, said:

I know this is a very long thread and not every post will get read, but I figure I might as well throw my voice into the mess for the heck of it.

I've given up on CW entirely. I had fun playing it from the time it was launched until about the time Vitric Forge was introduced. The maps got old fast - gameplay is always the same. For 14 months now we've had the same six (6!) maps and they're all designed like this:

- create an open area, spawn a team on the far side of it
- create another open area, spawn a team on the far side of that and add a base to it
- connect both areas via chokepoints (and optionally: use long narrow corridors)

The six CW maps we have all look like this:




Hopefully you can see that after rotating them so that they are all facing the same direction, they all pretty much look the same ---- attacker area on the left, defender area on the right, and gates in between, sometimes with corridors, and all the objectives squished together. Perhaps PGI could experiment with completely different designs. Put them on the test servers for a couple hours of rigourous testing if necessary to check and refine balance. But do something new, something different. Try putting a stronghold in the middle of a map for once, or having the gates so far out that all of the fight occurs within a much more expansive defender base. Try having secondary objectives in vastly different locations. Maybe try having a map where the defender base is tiny but they can leave the base and engage before the attackers get to the gates (but they have to scout since the attacker area is so large). All of these ideas and more.





But it's not just the map design. It's the humdrum boring repetitiveness of the game mode. Even Skirmish and Conquest are more diverse than Invasion. Much more diverse map layouts will do most of the work, but we also need some new and refreshing objectives. And unfortunately, we also need some AI so we can have tanks and aerotech. We need to see escort objectives at some point. I'd also like to see something like Terrain Control from Living Legends, where teams can take control of and spawn at firebases, disable and restore defense turrets, and I wouldn't even mind the rank/C-Bill system where you start with lighter mechs and earn your way up to more tonnage. This game mode would require some massive maps, about the size of Alpine and Polar, but that's what I want to see in this game - that's the type of gameplay that might drag me back into faction warfare.

I know this sounds like a lot, but christ it's been almost two years since CW released and we've been playing the same dribble the whole time. Nothing much has changed at all.

Your paint work should end up on Russ' desk as well as PGI's breakroom fridge. For reals, some of those maps look fun.

[Kin3ticX]

I hereby announce the panel dream team

1. Antonius Rex (Supreme Chancellor Palpatony)
2. Queenblade (Tony's brother from another mother and the mastermind behind 228th IBR's CW front)
3. Mech the Dane (Defender of Space Vikings, keeper of Magic Norse Stones of Great Power)
4. Crockdaddy (Elite Space Samurai and the personal body guards of our Dear Coordinator)
5. Pat Kell (The wrath of the Falcons Claw. You dare refuse his council?)

Haters gonna hate. But seriously, would be foolish of PGI not to have these 5 people on the future panels.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 25 July 2016 - 07:25 PM.

[N0MAD]

The edit on my last post may be overlooked, so..
If you are looking at why there is a population problem in FP, why instead of inviting people who already play FP and may have vested interests as either loyalist/mercs dont you invite people who have say 5-10k games and dont play FP? surely they can give you better input as to why people dont play it?, just seems common sense to talk to people who dont play to find out the reasons they dont..

[50 50]

@Bombadil
Thank you for your efforts with this.

To comment specifically on the points for this first Roundtable:

Player population
The low population will be a reflection of the way the mode plays out. It does not offer enough of a difference to quick play to draw people in and make it appealing. It is also not a mode that accepts or allows casual players due to how long it takes to pull together a team for a drop and also how players get poached from one queue to fill another but it is also reflected by the next two points....

Buckets
Obviously the more buckets in the game, the more spread out the population can get. While scouting has provided a different mode, it has taken players from invasion and I feel that is one aspect that could be combined. The addition of any more modes will only further split the player base and make it even harder. In this regard I believe the overall view of Faction Play is too broad. It's setup at the moment as a 12 player assault and 4 player scout vs another 16 players where perhaps it should instead be a 12 player team consisting of a scout lance. Any divisions in the player base will naturally result in the next point....

Queue times
Because a larger group gets priority and the match maker will poach players out of another queue, smaller groups and solo players can easily experience greater queue times which is not helped by the already low numbers and multiple buckets.
There is too much of a reliance on the match maker to work it all out for which the blame and frustration is thrown back at the developers.

Solo vs group play
This was tried but did not succeed due to the lack of appeal to player to devote time to the mode. Those that did simply ended up splitting the buckets and creating greater wait times for both sides. It is not practical to make this division, nor should it be necessary. The question becomes how can a solo player get a good experience on a casual basis in a mode that is designed for group play.

Factions
While there are a lot of factions, it is a fairly important point for many players. While it does mean that the player base is split, it does not prevent players from combining in defense with their allies. The current format does not allow different factions to combine on attack which creates a disparity in favour of a defending side. Reducing the number of factions available may reduce how many battles are occurring at once but it will not encourage players to participate. Loyalist are very protective and patriotic when it comes to their choice in faction.

The format of Faction Play (ie. 24/7 vs. scheduled times or other options)
One of the problems which was brought up quite a while ago and has been raised again under this topic is how the attack phases are implemented in an international game. There was a certain amount of angst when the efforts of players in one time zone were lost as players from another region became active. There has also be comments recently on the speed at which planets can be taken and there is a real rush to the mode. This is another aspect that needs to be considered with player population, we are not all in the NA time zone.

As I see it, we need to break from what is still a quick play match format trying to emulate a larger scale battle and evolving campaign. All the components are there, it just needs to be adjusted to suit the different scale.
That is why I will push for a continual battle which allows players to join in, leave, be replaced by others and feel like they are part of a large ongoing struggle.

Consider these points with the above issues:

• Create battle zones which are hosted on the respective servers during their prime times, one for each server on each planet. 3 zones. By making the zones regionally, it favours players in those zones and will allow them to take responsibility and protect their efforts with only one zone being open at a time.
  
• By allowing players to drop in and out of matches up to the 12 per side, there is no waiting time and suddenly a disperse population does not really matter. Even dropping into battle with no opposition is not such a problem if the battle itself has enough objectives, scope of play and evolving dynamics to keep a large team busy.
  
• By bringing together all of the great elements we have from all the modes, we can combine them into an epic battle that will have enough objectives, scope of play and evolving dynamics.
  
• Make the mode accessible to casual, solo and group players by removing the restrictions of the match maker, so we allow for a smaller scale while still encouraging the overall mode and catering for the diversity of options. This involves adjusting several other features but by encouraging and developing on the small scale we build a foundation that works on a larger scale.

When I view the mode as a whole and break it down to it's individual parts there are a lot of aspects to Faction Play. But I can see answers to all of them, some of which may only require a few adjustments. The above points are specifically in regards to addressing the issues for this first round table, though it may not have enough detail to really explain how it would fit together. (Happy to discuss)

[Carl Vickers]

50 50, on 25 July 2016 - 07:28 PM, said:

Solo vs group play
This was tried but did not succeed due to the lack of appeal to player to devote time to the mode. Those that did simply ended up splitting the buckets and creating greater wait times for both sides. It is not practical to make this division, nor should it be necessary. The question becomes how can a solo player get a good experience on a casual basis in a mode that is designed for group play.

@50 50

Great post except for the above. They split the queues in a way designed to fail. What PGI should have done is split them the same as they split the QP queues. If you are in a group, you go into a group queue on the planet. If you are solo, you get a solo queue, doesnt matter if you have unit tags or not. To stop the farming by sync dropping, make a limit of no more than 2-4 players of the same unit in the same solo queue.

[MovinTarget]

N0MAD, on 25 July 2016 - 07:25 PM, said:

The edit on my last post may be overlooked, so..
If you are looking at why there is a population problem in FP, why instead of inviting people who already play FP and may have vested interests as either loyalist/mercs dont you invite people who have say 5-10k games and dont play FP? surely they can give you better input as to why people dont play it?, just seems common sense to talk to people who dont play to find out the reasons they dont..

I see your point and to be honest it has to be both... the people that gave up/won't touch it and the people trying to keep it alive.

[Fractis Zero]

Move Domination to FW where it belongs. It will add depth to the game play. When introduced you can play with the capture time so that most matches will end before all 4 waves are deployed. You will get a lot of hunting for the last mech after wiping out the other 11 players. The survivor will need to survive until the next wave makes it back.

Desperately need to add PVE to FW to get rid of ghost drops. And if you have PVE only planets I guarantee they will be highly contested. PVE to spice things up you can barter for difficulty. Add degrees of difficulty that is determined by the unit. If you add PVE open up more planets to attack. This way small units can attack a separate planet and might be able to get a tag on one.

New mode, FW Conquest. Since you love lane warfare in FW, put the capture points in the middle of the lanes. Make it so that you cannot cross lanes and will add a flavour of true scouting as you will need to find the enemies numbers.

8v8 raid. Have an objective to capture (like a convoy). The team that wins each gets a Supply Cache (this can make you money if they want to open the caches). This can be a fast mode where you don't have to wipe out the other team.

Edited by Fractis Zero, 25 July 2016 - 08:12 PM.

[soaq]

https://www.reddit.c...e_for_upcoming/

[Jack Booted Thug]

50 50, on 25 July 2016 - 07:28 PM, said:

@Bombadil
Thank you for your efforts with this.

To comment specifically on the points for this first Roundtable:

Player population


Buckets


Queue times


Solo vs group play


Factions


The format of Faction Play (ie. 24/7 vs. scheduled times or other options)

I get that people are trying to help, but I feel like I'm in the twilight zone right now reading some of the suggestions and seeing the format topics that are proposed to be discussed.


Remember phase 1? A lot of people were playing. Rivalries developed, alliances were forged, smack talk, backstabbing,... it was pretty fun for a while.

But the mode was shallow, limited, and had no real meaning. Players left once the novelty wore off. The tweaks, next phases, and CW events provided only temporary boosts to population - but never could sustain momentum.....

because....... the mode is still shallow, limited, repetitive, lacking variety in game play and objectives and strategies.


Condensing ques or buckets and changing rewards structures only makes it a bit easier for the few still interested in playing to play.

That's it. That's all any of the topics above proposed would address.


Whoever is on the panel, really needs to understand the topics above aren't what's wrong with CW, they are a result of what's wrong with CW.

[Deathlike]

Jack Booted Thug, on 25 July 2016 - 08:15 PM, said:

I get that people are trying to help, but I feel like I'm in the twilight zone right now reading some of the suggestions and seeing the format topics that are proposed to be discussed.


Remember phase 1? A lot of people were playing. Rivalries developed, alliances were forged, smack talk, backstabbing,... it was pretty fun for a while.

But the mode was shallow, limited, and had no real meaning. Players left once the novelty wore off. The tweaks, next phases, and CW events provided only temporary boosts to population - but never could sustain momentum.....

because....... the mode is still shallow, limited, repetitive, lacking variety in game play and objectives and strategies.


Condensing ques or buckets and changing rewards structures only makes it a bit easier for the few still interested in playing to play.

That's it. That's all any of the topics above proposed would address.


Whoever is on the panel, really needs to understand the topics above aren't what's wrong with CW, they are a result of what's wrong with CW.

I've had these kinds of discussions many times... mostly with the unit, but also with others that play with us.

Before you can properly propose a solution, you have to figure out what the core issues are... and when you don't analyze what's wrong, you're only going to have bandaid solutions that don't really fix the bleeding.

If this doesn't even get a discussion, there's no hope to salvage FW.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

FP GAME MODE: Raid

For a determined amount of time in the 3 prime time, time zones.

Make a generic supply cache. Attackers drop, try and steal however many crates back to a drop ship or destroy opponents. Also have a chance of MC supply caches when you interact with a warehouse.

Raiding for supplies is a very lore friendly game mode. Something different than killing for the sake of it.

[AnTi90d]

Fractis Zero, on 25 July 2016 - 08:11 PM, said:

Move Domination to FW where it belongs. It will add depth to the game play. When introduced you can play with the capture time so that most matches will end before all 4 waves are deployed. You will get a lot of hunting for the last mech after wiping out the other 11 players. The survivor will need to survive until the next wave makes it back.

New mode, FW Conquest. Since you love lane warfare in FW, put the capture points in the middle of the lanes. Make it so that you cannot cross lanes and will add a flavour of true scouting as you will need to find the enemies numbers.

GOD, NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! Jesus Christ, NO!

Conquest and Domination should be in their own third category of matchmaker, along with Capture the Flag and whatever other reindeer games PGI comes up with.

I want to Skirmish/Assault and I want to Invasion. I'm here to blow up mechs and sometimes generators and turrets. not run around and stand in one spot for some arbitrary reason.

[StarSauron]

-Well can't the scout mode just switch between tonnages ?
Like this week max 40 ton, next week min 80 ton on much smaller map.
So people can play it with "different mechs"


I would like instead of "run around" just go fight with a smaller group of big mechs.
4 Kodiaks vs 4 Atlases on small map would make in my opinion more fun.


- The simple answer would be , why people do instead play quick matches ?
you don't wait so long, teams are fair, matches are faster,

from scouting, you do get advantages, is in my opinion ion somehow weird,
because both sides wins, so even by 10% vs 90% still both teams must have same Intel.
give one team Long Tom Artillery is in my opinion really bad.


-cant we just repelace by (faction warfire) "Invasion" with the mode "Domination" from (Quick Play) ?
https://mwomercs.com/game/modes

than change to this
Control the Communication Beacon for a cumulative total of 5 minutes
or Destroy most Enemy Mechs

That means by 5 min you can still reorganise to attack with next wave of 12 mechs.


That mode over there would be in my opinion more enjoyable and make more sense.

Edited by StarSauron, 25 July 2016 - 08:39 PM.

[InspectorG]

Here is what i got:
TL;DR - base CW on a turn-based resource management game. I did post this in the Requested Features thread and have more details if wanted.


CW needs a larger overall meta-game like the below. Would anyone be interested in such a thing? The idea is loosely based of off some popular boardgames and, i think, could be used for CW.

MetaGame for CW and base for how to tie Solo to CW:

PGI hires unbiased mods to monitor and enforce Unit/faction contracts(think treaty). Each player/Unit gets a loyalty rating(% of contracts honored)

Make CW turn based. 1 turn = 3 weeks? Season is 6 turns? After 6 turns, season over, faction with most resources wins. Map reset. Very boardgame-ish.

Each Faction get 3 Elite units that represent leadership. Players determine. These Elite units can spend Action Points(think buying resources, Attacking, Defending, Terraforming...etc. Each Unit capped at 12 members. Would need tryouts. votes, Clan Trials, etc. players an do this on thier own.

Each Faction gets 3 Planets. Each planet has 10 maps set in an determined order(think HP) and each map has 5 resource slots(think modules).
Each Faction has a set# of resource generating modules they play on said slots. Where they places them determines how vulnerable they are. Example: Biggest resource module nets 500,000,000bills per turn.

Each Faction determine's Factions 'Trial' Drop decks for CW that ANY faction player can use in CW.
These mechs will have a Tier Rating that determines Usage Cooldown.(see Mech Tiers)

Each Faction determines a Light/Medium/Heavy/Assault GARRISON mech each with its own Faction chosen Build.
- Related to faction chosen Maps and Terraforming.

GARRISON mechs have a role for Solo as well...

The better the Drop deck the more Cbills it takes to drop in them(attack, defend, Scout, etc)

Faction Actions:

Upgrade Garrison Mechs. Some for CW. Some for Recon. Some for Solo.

Terraform - think Map quirks that affect weapons like ambient heat and Air Pressure that affects Dakka Velocity. Limited by cost and resource slots per Map.

Build Defenses( think modules that are consumable Mech Repairs in match, Ammo restocks in match, satellite UAV, LONG TOM(gonna cost you!!), Arty strikes, Drop Ship raids...etc.)

Raid(free, Solo, Group drops on enemy Maps that yield minimal rewards and loser doesnt lose much.)

Attack(think costly and requiring lots of Unit coordination) A Faction attacks another's Planet's Map. They win, they occupy and can claim Resource Modules.

Defend - like Attack but can use Defenses.

Recon - think Scouting matches but wins reveal info on enemy Units/Players/ RESOURCE MODULE LOCATIONS/ Garrison Mechs/ Garrison Mech loadouts/ Map Terraforms.
Recon also covers investing in HIDING via modules, other modules and the info stated above.

Forge Treaty - Hire other Units, other Factions to do dirty work.

Trade - sell/buy other Faction's GARRISON MECHS, represented as consumable modules. Could be used for covert operations..etc.

MOVE RESOURCES - think you occupy an enemy map, you can try to take a module(say, one that nets 10,000,000Cbills/turn) - will be expensive- or leave it and skim some of its rewards(mabe half per turn?)
Cost/risk associated with stealing it but easier to skim from it as long as you hold that map.

PLANET LOSS:
Each has 10 maps
Last map has Capitol.
Capitol Falls, Planet lost.
VICTOR can offer Vassalage(think they get half total resources each turn for as long as they rule)

Factions would need to balance terraforming, garrison mechs, map choice, defenses, scouting, treaties, Attacks, and WHERE to place resources.

SCOUTING

Successful scouting nets Intel Points that are Map/faction specific.

These points can be spent by leadership or SOLD to other Factions.

The Info gained by spending Intel should not be 100% accurate to ensure some redundancy in Scouting missions. Cross referencing to ensure validity.

RAIDS

Anyone can drop to attack another planet, similar to how it is now and resistance can be more based on Solos or casuals where the tryhards invest more into the important drops.

Raids should have a slight effect on the Factions involved.

SOLO
Now get this...

Solo can participate in CW.
You need a tier system in place. PGI meets with high level players and determines T1-T4 mechs.

Now, T1 mechs get a long cooldown between usages, more for CW(12 hours?), Minutes for Solo(15?)

T2 mechs get a shorter cooldown. CW=2 hours? 5 minutes for Solo?

T3 mechs get NO COOLDOWN/UNLIMITED USE

T4 mechs are FARMERS. Give x3+ Rewards in Solo, x6+? in CW?

Why the farm mechs?

Solo players join a Faction.
Faction collects TAXES on Solo player's matches. Goes to Faction resources for Elite UNits to spend.

Solo player, in return, gets GARRISON MECH consumable modules. Could also work in Map-specific Quirks for Solo.
Solo players Newbs/Casuals would gain quick access to each weightclass with premade loadouts.

PGI can use this system to allow Factions to introduce T3/T4 variants of pre-release-expired mechpacks for players to try. Think rental car-pokemech. Players missed all the pre-release goodies but an try the T3/T4 variants in exchange for taxes.

LP SYSTEM gets reworked to offer better rewards for CW loyalists(and ones with high Player/Unit Loyalty %) and also give rewards to Solos who wear the Faction's logo(and pay taxes).


Also - side note. Some weapons still need fixed(lbx, MG, etc)
BETTER MAP OBJECTIVES.

I have more detailed notes but wont bother expanding on them if no one is interested.


This is just the synopsis of how CW could work if modeled after a handful of popular boardgames. Waterdeep. Small World. Civilization(Syd Mead)...etc etc.

[N0MAD]

From certain post ive just read the panel has already been chosen, whats the bet they are all group representatives from active FP groups??. why does this matter?.
If you look at 50 50s post above you see a list of topics to be discussed but in reality they are all covered by the first item on the list,,, Player population..
None of the other subjects would be an issue if population wasnt THE main issue, would buckets be a problem with a viable pop?, waiting times etc? no they wouldnt.
When you have an issue with people not playing you dont talk to the people who play,, you talk to the people who DONT play and find out why they dont..

[InspectorG]

Older notes/ more of the above:


*****THIS IS ALL CONCEPTUAL AND LIKELY HAS FLAWS/EXPLOITS*****

A. PGI needs to have ingame Game Masters to regulate Unit/Faction/Merc contracts. These are not the contracts we have but actual deals made between Units/Factions that can actually be broken. Think treaties, hired units from other Factions, Spies, Trade of mechs(more on that later).
Players/Units have a loyalty rating showing how they honor contracts and 'Black Ops' sytle of play can easily be built in - but would cost players a LOT of Cbills.

GMs would also help regulate 'Turns' and each 'Season'. Each season could be 2 months or so. After each season a soft reset.


B. Planets need to mean something-

1. Each Faction only gets 3 planets. Scarcity. Each planet consists of 10 maps seleced by the Elite Units(Maps are basically HP and hold resources that are represented as modules). Each map has 5 slots for Resource Modules. Allocation of modules between the maps would be a means of defending/obfuscating them as enemy Recon would have to find them via scouting.

2. Each Unit is capped at 12 members. Each Player and Units gets an Honor rating( % of treaties kept % of Unit betrayal) Moderation would be needed in case of Alt Account Abuse, though, if done properly, could lead to the capability to have deep spies...

2a. Each Faction has 3 Elite Units, which represents the decision makers. Players have to agree on their own system of governance as to the decision making. Oh the drama!!!
These 3 Units alone can determine where to place/spend Faction Resources, Treaties, Trade, and Spend Action Points(see below)

3a. Planets can be fortified/terraformed. Think global quirks for defenders as well as prematch map selection.
Set Home Map: think capital city that if lost, faction is then Deposed.
Set defenses: select maps for specific sequence attackers have to conquer in order to make it to the capitol. Not the system we have now where each pie slice is a map but rather a 'stack' of sequenced maps that the defenders know, that the attackers WONT know(unless they spend Intel) and each map is basically a Hit Point for the planet. Last map is the Capitol.
Set Objective per map: norml CW attack/counter, skirmish, conquest, assault, domination

3b. Each Faction starts with X number of Resource Modules that fit in a 'Module Interface' UI that allows the Elite Factions to use/store modules, similar to mech modules. Each Resource Module gives X amount of Cbills per FW 'turn'.

3c. Module Interface: Each Planet has a UI available only to the Elite Units(or a selected leader(s). This could be something like a panel of 20 Module slots where Resource Modules, Terraforming, R&R, Map, Fortification, Scouting Modules are Placed. Location is specific and needed for Scouting would be a target for scouting missions.

3d MODULES. Terraforming(Modules): Raise/lower ambient temp, raise/lower humidity-affects beam range, Raise lower air pressure- affects ballistic velocity, Raise/lower magnetic belts- affects Radar Range Raise/lower Gravity - affects JJ height Raise/lower Wind - affects missile spread

Terraforming: Map selection for drops - defender's advantage.

R&R CONSUMABLE MODULES(uses slot in mech, may need to add extra slots to mechs for CW) Repair- recover lost component, Repair - recover lost armor, Repair, Recover lost equip, Rearm - ammo is reset.
Garrison Mech Upgrade(more on this later - think Faction specific trial Mechs)
Calvary Mech Upgrade(again, later but think Custom trials sold to other factions)
FORTIFICATION: Once per match consumable modules. Think Long Tom but also Mine Fields, Extra R&R modules, BETTER RADAR, basically one shot advantages.RARE.

4. Scouting nets you intel credits, which are spent on the following:
Determine enemy home Map
Determine Defense Maps - learn where you are dropping before you attack
Determine Which Enemy Units are defending
Determine which enemy Units are attacking
Determine which enemy Units are hired from other Factions/mercs.
Determine which players are in enemy Unit and their drop decks.
Determine Enemy Garrison Upgrades
Determine Enemy Treaties
Determine Tax(see below re Solo Play)
Determine how target Elite Unit spent Action Points
Sabotage: alter enemy terraforming per map
Sabotage: raid enemy modules
Sabotage: raid enemy trade(think as cancelling trade agreements)
Sabotage: alter enemy Garrison mech upgrades
SUPPORT: think of the above FORTIFICATION modules mentioned above.
Conceal Friendly Unit
Comceal Map sequence
Conceal Terraform
Conceal Upgrades(R&R modules equipped, Fortification)


5. Each faction has 3 Elite Units that decide most of the major decisions(Faction Actions). Unit Coffers will be a big thing here. Comps will likely decide admittance and SHOULD be competitive.
ELITE Units cost LOTS of Cbills to field - requires planning of when to drop the hammer
ELITE Units can let their 12 members break off and lead other 12 mans.
Non-ELITE Units cost far less to field.

6. Faction Actions: X actions(ACTION POINTS) per turn and a cost would have to be determined for each action. Example: if 1 turn = 1 realtime week then perhaps 6 actions/week???
Planet upgrades
Attack orders
Defend orders
Trade orders - sell modules or Garrison mechs(represented as consumable modules that can be used for a drop deck)
Contract orders - treaties, trade, support missions
Recon Orders - spend Intel Credits: obtain info on enemy, conceal info about self, sabotage Enemy Modules

7. Garrison Mechs
This is how PGI can use UNBALANCED MECHS(T1, T2, T3, Farmer)
Comp-player community meets with PGI to determine T1, T2, etc mechs.

T1 mechs: Timby, AC, Kodiak, Scro, etc. 1 per weight class with predeterined 'trial' comp loadouts will have a 12 HOUR cooldown before they can be used again, each player only gets one such drop deck. Garrison Upgrades can affect this - will cost lots of cbills.

T2 mechs have a 10 drop cooldown(or whatever you get the idea) Same stipulations as above

T3 mechs ban be used at will with no cooldown. The workhorses of CW.

FARMER mechs are the worst but have a unique property - huge Cbill/XP bonus. This will have a large role in Solo. See below.

Factions can have specific Garrison mechs and specific Trial drop Decks that ALL FACTION MEMBERS have access to - no need to buy those mechs. Factions can buy(Uprgrade) unique quirks to them. Determined by Elite Units.

So a Player joins House Steiner and in CW has access to a drop deck of T1 mechs(copied from Metamechs as example) Battlemaster, Battlemaster, Blackjack, Oxide.
His/Her T2 deck would be: Stalker Stalker Hunchback Wolfhound.(or whatever is ok but not T1)
T3 deck is worse/etc/etc...

8. Recon Units
Pretty much the same as Garrison but geared towards Scouting.

9. Calvary Mechs
There are Faction specific Trail mechs that can be 'sold' as consumable modules to other Factions. As part of Trade or Treaty agreements. Can be same as Garrison mechs/same loadouts or Garrison mechs/different loadouts.
***This allows allies to drop in mechs suited to the planet in question's terraforming***


10. Solo Play
Here is where Solos Puggers can help the CW Factions.

A player joins a Faction, say FRR.
They drop in Solo and the Faction gets a cut of their rewards(Tax). Farmer Mechs give a bonus as to cover the 'Tax' and generate a nice bonus regardless. Say: 200k in rewards AFTER Tax for an average T4 Solo PLayer. BIG MONEY!!! Casual Players and 'Bads' can contribute this way...
This 'Tax' extracted goes to the Faction's Coffers which are controlled by the 3 Elite Units.
IN EXCANGE, per X amount of Tax Collected, Solo player gets a Calvary Module from a small sample of select faction mechs, fully Upgraded as per the faction's Garrison mechs. Plug 'n Play new shiny fully upgraded Mech with comp loadout.

Example:
Billy Pug-Rider plays Solo. He plays just like MWO plays now, casual and buys whatever mechs he can via $ or Cbill.
Each match a fixed portion of his rewards goes to the FRR TAx.
But Billy can always drop in a Farmer mech to boost his earnings. Average should be 200-300k even if somewhat a 'Bad'.
More he farms , the more Calvary Mech consumables he can get and this can save him buying 3 of any mech or lets him sample around as he changes Factions(little or no penalty for Solos)
To BALANCe this out, Less populaced Factions give better/more modues for Calvary mechs for less Tax. Big Factions extract more Tax for fewer Calvary modules.


BASIC EXAMPLE OF CONCEPT:

House Steiner's comp players decide the 3 Elite Units: Iron Fisters, 12th House Guard, and the Steiner Scouts.
Over VOIP, they decide, collectively that of their 3 planets, one will be fortified to the max, and the other 2 left as-is.

The Homeowrld will be planet Germanic Paradise.
Planet 1 will be The Iron Pit.
Planet 2 will be C-137.

The collective leadership decides that Germanic Paradise will be set up to support Heavier mechs and favoring heavy Dakka.
So, they spend their resources on:
Capitol City map will be Sulfuric
Terraform the ambient temp to the max - resting heat would be 20%(or whatever HARD penalty to hot mechs/lazer mechs)
Raise the humidity to reduce beam range by 10%
Lower Air pressure to give ballistsics/Missiles a 30% velocity increase(better peeking)
Continual investment in R&R modules for the Elite Units while defending
Continual spending on Concealing the ambient Temp on various maps, but specifically the Capitol.

House Steiner's Recon Units arent the greatest so they hired the FRR to do some dirty work for them. A Treaty was formed for 1 week of Recon on Clan Wolf.(Steiner and FRR agreed to the terms, PGI GM moderator approved)
FRR's Recon gathered 687,098,321 Intel points for House Steiner in exchange for 50 Calvary Modules(40 Atlas-S and 10 battlemasters)

House Steiner spends Intel to determine that:
House Wolf's 3 Elite Units are Wolf Crusaders, Furry ********, and Exiled Hides.
Wolf's Garrison mechs are very lazer and SRM heavy
Wolf Hired Jade Falcon to collect intel on FRR
Wolf Hired Jade Falcon to sabotage Ghost Bears.

House Steiner thinks it will be wise to spend Intel on Raiding Ghost Bears and makin it look like Wolfs.
Steiner hires FRR again for more Recon but they have to look like Wolf. This will cost 876,576 Intel per raid.(Conceal + Sabotage Modules given to FRR Scouts)
Steiner needs to attack to get more Cbills even though Tax is steady. They will attack Wolf hoping that Ghost Bears jump in as well.

House Liao offers a Treaty with Steiner to help attack Wolf in exchange for Cbills and Calvry Modules.

Steiner agrees, but doesnt know that Liao will yank their support at a vital time because Jade Facon paid them lots of Cbills and some Long Tom modules(x5 Modules). But, who will Liao honor? Steiner and betray the Falcons? Falcons and bone Steiner?

[Wintersdark]

xX PUG Xx, on 25 July 2016 - 03:48 PM, said:

There are two main reasons I play as a Merc -:

1. I have 290+ 'Mechs on this account, all of them upto the Phoenix Hawk minus a few individual variants here and there (Sorry Cat' C4 our time together was short but you're sister C1 and cousin K2 are hotter )

If we rewound the clock to 2012 and PGI announced that an account would be limited to using one version of Tech (Clan or IS), I would gladly have setup two accounts and split purchases between them and switched accounts when I felt like using one or the other. However as it stands, if I want make use of my purchases I have to switch from one side of the lines to the other; the same as MANY other players in the game.
[Spoiler]
2. Due to the situation we find ourselves in with low population and activity, I move to where the fighting is or where I believe I may be able to rustle up fights for my unit by coordinating with another unit ir units. This coordination is done both in fighting with AND against other units; we're here to play the game, not ghost cap bragging rights.

So if there was a way to give players the ability to use both Tech types without having to Faction hop or fundamentally altering the design of the game (although I did suggest just this about two years ago), then I'm all for it. But please do not suggest punishing those of us that have been around, supported continuously and still play the game without offering some sort of olive branch.

I do agree that the current situation not only breaks with Lore but also with reality, perhaps a system that essentially has the Loyalist hire mercenaries would work or if the resources were available, an automated system that creates short and longterm contracts.

Once Loyalists vote for an attack lane, this creates contracts through the "MRBC bulletin board". Merc units can review and select contracts from the board and must commit the necessary forces to accomplish the objectives or not receive payment. More difficult contracts have higher payouts and perhaps secondary bonuses for attached parameters that Loyalist units can pay for from their coffers.[spoiler]

I have struggled with this since CW was first released. While I've only got ~140 mechs spread evenly between the factions, I really hate that I can only ever use half in FP.

In fact, this results in my not purchasing new IS mechs, even though I'd like them. I haven't been able to figure out a better way, but this is a major issue.

[50 50]

@Carl Vickers
That's a good point and would have done the split as you suggested. However, I do know that some people jumped out of their units to try the solo queue, but really, it should have been as i was in quick play.

That said, it is still a division of the population and the mode is not enticing enough at the moment to really bring in crowds.

And that's where I completely agree with you @Jack Booted Thug.
If faction play incorporated aspects of the quick play modes, plus invasion, plus utilize elements of scouting there is suddenly a lot of objectives in the mode.
I posted it in a bit more detail earlier in this thread but I think it would be great to have an enlarged map to fight over that uses all these bits, albiet have them changed so they mean something in the context of the overall battle.

• Capture locations to create new deployment zones. (conquest)
  
• Capture a strategic site to add a benefit to your team such as a radar. (domination)
  
• Capture the base to gain control of the supply depot to gather salvage points --> repairs. (assault)
  
• Disable the orbital cannon to allow larger dropships to land --> larger deployments. (invasion)
  
• Deploy intel listening beacons as a consumable to gather intel points --> info warfare (scouting)
  
• Hold a location on the map and fight off enemies. (counterattack)
  
• Meet an enemy lance moving into reinforce. (skirmish)

If the map was large enough to incorporate these elements, allow for a bit of random placement so things are not always in the same spot and we have a fog of war effect..... I mean... there's more, but you'd need to pry me out of that mode with a crow bar.

If the topic of the first round table was about dealing with queues and population, I won't deny that a more detailed battle to enjoy would bring in more players. However, allowing a less restrictive approach in terms how many players can join or start a match and how players can join and leave should allow for smaller numbers to participate while still catering for he large groups.

Worried about the death ball rolfstomp perhaps? If the map allows more freedom, has more objectives and has enough size, it could be possible for players to evade and scout out the area avoiding the enemy patrols until more players join and the battle escalates. That's where the call to arms should come in... There are a lot of other aspects and peripheral features that we can discuss, but at the moment... just holding back.

[jss78]

StarSauron, on 25 July 2016 - 08:38 PM, said:

-Well can't the scout mode just switch between tonnages ?
Like this week max 40 ton, next week min 80 ton on much smaller map.
So people can play it with "different mechs"

I agree, variable tonnage would be an extremely easy way to add variety to gameplay.

I like that the cap it quite low in Scouting, because for the first time ever, Scouting's given lighter mechs a place to shine. But you could maybe allow light heavies in some weeks, and take the cap down to 40-45 tons other weeks.

And could vary the tonnage in Invasion too. And I don't mean by 5 tons. Medium-heavy one week, Steiner wet dream the next.

Edited by jss78, 25 July 2016 - 09:32 PM.